If I were a liberal Loohoopa or a Kathay!
- Part 1 -

Loghan H. *

Would anyone care to know who the Loohoopas or the Kathays were? In the midst of political expediency and populist cacophonic measures, the true sense of identity and belongingness seemed to have lost its charm and relevance in the state. Emotions have taken over reasons; there isn't any space left for the liberal minds.

Eclipsing free thoughts and divergent opinions for a imprudent common cause is like practicing collective anarchy – it is perhaps the greatest danger that we face today. Needless to say 'collective anarchy' will be as bad as despotic rulers of the past – the consequence to common people will be the same.

The contested past

It would be foolhardy to assume that Manipur had a happy and congenial past – be it in the surrounding hill tribes, with the neighboring kingdoms, and more importantly within the valley itself. Moreover, the intra-community conflict within the valley or within a tribe/hill people was as high as or far greater than inter-communities conflict. The sketchy history of the state is nothing but internecine anecdotes of different small principalities. The oral traditions of different communities and written records of valley people are testimony to Manipuri's vicious past.

The valley was never a homogenous, cohesive and stable principality – at different historical periods, different communities had ruled over the valley. The Khumans, the Luwangs and the Moirangs had their share of rules and dominations in the past, and it was only in the later period (say around 17th century) that the Meiteis' domination began to set in. As late as early 19th century, the Moirang clan had its domination over other principalities. Such was the divergence among the valley people that many scholars strongly believe that different clans in the valley had their origins in different parts of the hills.

It is therefore quite possible that the genetical divergence within the current valley people (generally referred as Meitei community) may have been much higher than the divergence between hills and valley communities. Likewise the divergence within the Nagas or the Kukis may have been much higher than between the Nagas and the Kukis or between the Nagas and the Meiteis or between the Meiteis and the Kukis. A systematic and rigorous scientific investigation would be required even to disagree with such an assumption, let alone disapproving it. As much as it would be wrong to paint all the hill tribes with the same brush, it would be equally misleading to club all the valley communities in the same pool.

We also often hear the proposition that the Nagas are one; many of the socio-political movements are based on these assumptions. It's always good to have a unifying character on which every community could stand together. But, if that character is based only on hatred of a particular community, the unification process may not last long. The more one digs for a common character, the more divergence one will get in the process.

Language, Culture, Art, Belief System, Dress, Food Habits, Territoriality, Genetic make-up, Political system/administration, Social Institutions, etc. are the characters that are commonly associated for identification of a group. Take any of these characters and the result is here for any one to see. If Christianity is to be considered as the only unifying character, then the Kukis will be as much Nagas as the Nagas themselves.

As much as there are ambiguities in the origin of different communities, there are ambiguities in territorialities of each of the communities. Except for the valley region, there existed not a single organized administrative structure in the hills. The concept of a well defined territoriality (physical boundary) was introduced by the British for the first time in Manipur in early 19th century – it was at the time of signing of 'Treaty of Yandaboo' in 1825 AD that approximate territorial boundary of the state was fixed. The same boundary was again rectified at the time of merger to Indian Union, with minor adjustments. The state territory that we have today is the same as what we had 200 years ago.

It would certainly be inappropriate on our (Manipur's) part to claim the areas conquered by our forefathers, deep inside the Burmese territory or Assam, as our own now. If that is the case, the Burmese could as well claim over the entire region as they had conquered the region on several occasions. Having agreed, signed and rectified on many occasions, the internationally accepted treaties and protocols need to be respected.

The undercurrent

There is an inherent and at times arrogant assertion that people in the valley had the birth-right to rule the state (then kingdom). Such chauvinistic mindset is so strong in the valley, especially in Imphal, that even a street beggar in the capital would still abuse his masters coming from other parts with derogatory terms like 'Lawai-Machas' (country folks) or a 'Hao-Machas' (hill tribes) whenever they failed to oblige him. It was only a few generations ago or perhaps still followed in some of the families of present generation that people from the hills or other parts are treated as untouchables.

It is quite difficult to fathom how this sense of 'false superiority' emerged in the valley, for most of the oral histories and traditions of any community, though extremely brutal at times, never had an instance of segregation or practice of untouchability like the Hindu Caste system of mainland India. Intermarriage between different communities of Valley and Hills was not an uncommon practice; no wonder then many of valley's ancestral heroes were direct descendents of one hill community or another.

The conversion to Hinduism might have introduced the practice of 'pure and impure' and nurtured deep fissures among various communities in the valley in the past, but it is the manifestation of this social hierarchical monolith in various forms and shapes in present generation that creates more trouble in the state. The more and more valley/Imphal centric development approach followed over the years has not helped the situation either. The over-jealous moral, cultural, religious and educational pandits in the valley are having a free run in the state for many years – imposition of Meitei mayek, Dress codes, Cultural dictates and even renaming of Radio channels (Kangla, Sangai, etc.).

It is high-time for everyone to remember that Manipur is not only for the valley or the Meiteis; the more one sees or defines Manipur through the narrow prism of Meitei-centric views, the more fissures and mistrusts it is going to create among all communities. One needs to come out of the palatial hangover of the Meitei superiority in the past and deal with the present reality of one among equals. The conventional notion of 'ruler and ruled' needs to give way to a more democratic form of mindset, both in letter and spirit. The Meiteis being the dominant group need to make amends and takes measures to reduce the trust deficit that exists among all communities.

The enemy within

At times we are so blinded with false hopes and false promises that we simply fail to see the enemy within. It is always easier to blame the big, white elephant than catching the crooked monkeys inside. The misappropriation of development funds, degeneration of state institutions and administrative systems, complete abandonment of rule of law, un-planned developmental approach, short-term and cheap political solutions, etc. are all our creations. If the growth of palatial houses of ministers, MLAs, contractors and power brokers were the development indicators for the last 2-3 years, then the state would have been declared as the un-challenged winner in the country.

It is true that the overall development approach of the state, concentrating in Imphal and its vicinity, is left much to be desired and needs to be corrected, but lack of implementation and transparency in other fields lie with the concerned districts. The deteriorating law and order situation has been cited as the prime factor for lapses in the administration or the lack of it, conveniently forgetting that some unscrupulous people are minting money out of this crisis situation. It is therefore fair to assume that the powers that be wish to keep the situation as it is – what better way to enjoy the perks, incentives, contracts, etc. sitting at home and without setting a foot in the real work place.

If the functioning of the system is to be corrected, it needs to be corrected from the grassroots level. Given the decentralized nature of administration and utilization of funds, without compliance of local authorities no fund can be transacted, let alone use it. Just imagine if the village chiefs in the hills were to refuse to blindly sign for the programs that had not been implemented in their areas, the next day there would be pandemonium in every state department for lack of fund utilization certificates. Unfortunately, this is not going to happen in our lifetime; if it were to happen, then each of the stakeholders/beneficiaries would have to abdicate his perennial source of income and opulent lifestyle.

The funds meant for people in the hills get siphoned off by tribal leaders, stationed either in the valley or district head quarters, in connivance with administrators, politicians and rough elements, before it reaches its destination. The same goes in the valley as well. The ultimate losers in this vicious cycle of exploitation are the voiceless common people, who are more concern about earning their livelihoods in a hard and fair way. Until we make the politicians, administrators, contractors, power brokers, etc make accountable, then things are not going to change on its own. If we wait for a full-proof system to arrive first before we start complying with the system, then things may never change - it would be like waiting for the 'egg-chicken' dilemma to resolve.

To be continued....